English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I am talking about this murder in North London where the guy Tom Rhys Pryce was simply walking home from the tube station and was attacked and stabbed to death for his belongings which totalled about £50 in value.

Has really got me thinking that surely a debate on the death penalty must be held in the UK, as how can there be any place in this world for people like these 2 animals that murdered him for no reason what-so-ever and then laughed about it afterwards.

What do you think?

2006-11-28 00:56:40 · 14 answers · asked by Chris G 3 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

14 answers

A death penalty would not likely stop people from committing such a crime. They have no value for any human life, including their own. It only saves the state the obligation of keeping the person(s) alive and in decent health.

2006-11-28 00:59:41 · answer #1 · answered by kingstubborn 6 · 1 0

The idea of the death penalty is very appealing. However, we all know that courts and judges sometimes get it wrong - are we prepared to risk some innocent people losing their lives? Is that an acceptable price to pay for saving the State a whole lot of money and giving the victim and by this time his/her family a sense of justice and protecting everyone else? I personally believe so.

Our society seems to be sprialling out of control with more and more callous crimes being committed by the day.

I think it's disgraceful that genuine hard working people scrape by without any help from the government and those who commit horrendous crimes and those who come into the UK to scrounge get everything handed to them on a plate.

The young generations that are coming of age have far less respect for anyone or anything than any previous generation by far - they do not care about consequences as there is often a way of dodging any penalty.

I believe that the UK should close it's borders to any more foreign nationals and seriously think about sending home those who have not yet been granted residency or citizenship. I'm no racist, I am a patriot and we are only a small island. Next I think a good look at compulsory national service should be in order. We need to instill some respect and discipline into those who lack it - English & foreign residents. When they grasp the concept and employ it they will also gain the respect of others and then fully appreciate the reasons for their 're-education'.

I do not wish to offend anyone with the above, but I'm a realist - the UK cannot continue to support the steady flow of immigrants as it leads to over-crowding, strain on the system and society, bad-feeling from native Brits which then leads to hate and race-related crime when everyone's standard of living and therefore mentality drops.

2006-11-28 01:28:24 · answer #2 · answered by nutcase_says_hi 1 · 0 0

when our forefathers drew up our constitution they looked at the
constitutions of other countries and took the best parts from others and Incorporated them into our constitution, there fore building the best constitution in the civilized world, Why can't our so called lawmakers and people do the same today look at what other countries are doing then they can get a good idea of what will or won't work. fact 1 countries with no death penalty have no more and usually less murders than the ones who have the death penalty, fact 2 countries with ridiculous sentencing guidelines have more crime and more people per capita in prison , America with ridiculous guide lines has more people per capita in prison than any other country in the world , fact is they have more people in prison period, Even more than china, north Korea, some one is not doing something right ? fact 3 the countries who do not have gun confiscating laws have less crime than the ones who have the supposedly gun control laws,
fact 4 death penalty laws do not deter murder or any other crime, the ones who do these crimes don't intend to get caught, fact 5 when a person goe's into court unlike other countries , in the U,S, when a person goe's into court he is going to prison unless he has big bucks like O,J, DID guilty or not, this country has a 98.8 %conviction ratio, how the hell can you get a fair trial with those conviction ratios, like in Ill where they murdered 47 men on death row, and later a reporter proved 35 were not guilty???? how can this happpen in a so called civilized society?

2006-11-28 01:37:00 · answer #3 · answered by jim ex marine offi, 3 · 1 0

I approve of the death penalty although it has not deterred that type of criminal in the U.S. The cost of the trials and the appeals leading up to the execution is costly and many time these criminals are suicidal and would welcome a way out of the life they have. Here in Illinois the death penalty was stopped several years ago after a dozen or so death row inmates were released from prison awaiting execution after DNA results found that they wrongly convicted by over zealous prosecutors who only wanted to close a case regardless who they convicted. Sometimes it was for political reasons and time it was just to satisfy the public. Seeing these monsters sit in a cell for the rest of their lives is probably a more suitable punishment short of allowing the family of the victim having the choice of punishment or execution. About 3 weeks ago a convict was released from a federal prison and went to a jewelry shop in my neighborood, jumped over the counter and shot the store owner who in turn pulled out his own gun and fired off about 5-7 rounds killing the would be robber. They found in the robbers possesions among the gun still clentched in his cold hands, duct tape, hand cuffs, and a mask. Thankfully the cycle of crime has ended in this case but had this happened just a few miles to the east in the city of Chicago the owner of the jewelry store would have to face charges of posession of a hand gun and some lawyer would probably file a case of wrongful death.

2006-11-28 01:15:46 · answer #4 · answered by tman 5 · 0 0

We need some sort of death penalty in this country.The government has gotten too soft on these sorts of crime.
The Police,should really stamp down hard on these criminals,but there hands are tied by all the red tape and political correctness.
The whole system is a shambles,with everyone blaming each other when something goes wrong

2006-12-01 23:47:59 · answer #5 · answered by nicky dakiamadnat600bugmunchsqig 3 · 0 0

Every murder is appalling. The hundreds that are being murdered daily in Iraq, the taxi drivers that are being murdered for the days takings,people just going about there daily live's. will the death penalty solve anything? I doubt it. better policing, better education,better stiffer sentancing,stronger deterents,3 strike rule, 3 convictions for fighting or similiar and 12 year minimum no early release. A lawyer should not be held higher than a tramp in the eyes of the law.

2006-11-28 01:07:54 · answer #6 · answered by philip s 1 · 0 2

I think this incident is appalling... unfortunately this kind of thing seems to happen a lot these days.

I am not even sure the death penalty would hinder some of the monsters committing these crimes - they are clearly not well

2006-11-28 01:02:07 · answer #7 · answered by Lupee 4 · 0 0

this is the funy element with regard to the regulation ... even human beings and agencies you dislike nonetheless have rights. the difficulty handy became into basically Freedom of Speech. they at the instant are not protecting the agencies attitude or practices ... they're protecting their precise to unfastened speech. Freedom of Speech isn't something that is utilized basically to human beings whom you compromise with. The regulation applies to each physique ... no longer basically human beings you like. Your question grossly misrepresents the situation. If an uninformed individual have been to make sure your question, they might incorrectly anticipate that the ACLU is protecting the sexual practices of NAMBLA individuals. they at the instant are not.

2016-12-10 17:40:40 · answer #8 · answered by zagel 4 · 0 0

I think Life should mean life in circumstances like these.

How can someone say they didn't mean to kill someone when they took a knife out with them plunged it into a human being with the intent to rob them. That is murder that should mean life.

If someone had a argument and just punched them but unfortunately the person fell and broke their neck and died that is an accident and should be manslaughter not murder.

2006-11-28 01:08:01 · answer #9 · answered by Peachy Girl 4 · 0 0

Yes, and we'll be all more appauled when they're back on the streets in less than ten years.

With all the over crowding and good behaviour, i bet they never do anything like the sentance they got.

If i was his family i would be sat twaiting with a shot gun to blow them away as soon as they took a step outside the prison.

2006-11-28 01:02:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers